If the recipient tests positive, they could still receive assistance, provided they enroll in a drug and alcohol treatment program. However, if a person refuses to take the test or refuses treatment, the family would lose the individual’s share of assistance or 40 percent of the grant, whichever is greater.

TANF currently requires recipients identified as drug- or alcohol-dependent to undergo treatment, but does not require testing. The assistance program has many requirements in place that ensure applicants can successfully look for jobs, and Benton said this makes sense.

Because many employers require applicants to pass drug tests as a condition of employment, it’s logical that the state would have the same requirement for people who accept state money for basic expenses, Benton said.

“We want to make sure that when we’re helping a family, the money is not going to drugs,” he said. “A hand up is what we’re trying to achieve here, not a handout.”

But Marcy Bowers, director of the Statewide Poverty Action Network, said it is "inconceivable" that TANF recipients use the money for drugs or alcohol. A family of three receives up to about $480 per month through a TANF grant, and this is barely enough to survive on in low-income housing, she said.

Washington is in a budget crisis, Bowers said, and many families need help with food and rent. The state shouldn't be spending money on drug testing, she said.

Donna Christensen, lobbyist for the Washington State Catholic Conference,
which represents various Catholic charities, said it doesn’t make any
sense to penalize drug users by limiting access to food assistance. And
forcing people to enroll in a treatment program won’t benefit them in
the long run, she said.

Christensen also worries that the penalties could fall on children, not just adults.

“TANF is about families,” she said. “The ones that are going to be impacted are children.”

Benton
said he does not want the bill to negatively affect children. However,
he said those dependent on drugs or alcohol may be spending the state
money on drugs and alcohol instead of food anyway.

The Vancouver lawmaker said he sponsored the bill as a favor to Rep. Jan Angel, R-Port Orchard, because her companion measure, House Bill 1190, did not receive a hearing in the Democrat-controlled House when she introduced it. Benton hopes the bill will fare better in the Senate, where two maverick Democrats have helped Republicans take control.

Doug Honig, communications director for the ACLU of Washington, has said they are reviewing the bill, but have not yet taken a stance.